ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION. 719 



cristata."* Filially, did the specimens on which Cystopliora 

 antiUarum was based come from the West Indies ? Dr. Gray 

 says, in his first reference to them in 1849, they were "lately 

 received from the West Indies." In the next paragraph he 

 says, " We have received an imperfect skin of a Seal from Ja- 

 maica, which was brought home by Mr. Gosse," certainly im- 

 plying that the specimens mentioned just before were not from 

 Mr. Gosse, and probably not from Jamaica. On the other 

 hand, Mr. Gosse's account .of the Pedro Seal indicates that Mr. 

 Gosse himself never even saw other specimens of this Seal 

 than the skin he sent to the British Museum, his whole account 

 of the species, aside from a description of this skin, being 

 avowedly given at second hand. Yet Dr. Gray the next year, 

 in redescribing these specimens, made the skin received from 

 Mr. Gosse the basis of his PJioca tropicalis, while the "skin and 

 skull" on which Cystopliora antiUarum became now exclusively 

 based received a definite locality and history, namely, " West 

 Indies, Jamaica, Mr. Gosse's Collection." t It was a year later 

 when Mr. Gosse published his account of the Pedro Seal, and 

 if these specimens, alleged to have been received from Jamaica 

 through him, had related to the Pedro Seal, or to any other Ja- 

 maican Seal,, it is probable that he would not have failed to refer 

 to them in treating of the Seals of Jamaica. Dr. Gray, how- 

 ever, doubtless firmly believed in their Jamaican origin, for he 

 not only gives for them the habitat and history above quoted 

 in all his subsequent notices of Cystopliora antillarum, but in 

 1866, in replying to Dr. Gill's remark that its West Indian hab- 

 itat required confirmation, says he (Gill) overlooked " the fact 

 that they were both [Phoca tropicalis and Cystopliora antiUa- 

 rum] collected in Jamaica and sent home direct from the island 

 by Mr. Gosse." | 



In regard to the occurrence of the genus Cystopliora in Ja- 

 maican waters, there are, in the present state of our knowledge 

 of the subject, only two alternatives, one of which implies the 

 acceptance of Gray's alleged origin of his specimens of C. an- 

 tiUarum as valid, while the other assumes an accidental error 

 of locality; since its presence or absence there, so. far as we 

 now know, turns upon this point. In favor of the latter alter- 

 native is the pretty strong inference, derivable from the gen- 



*Hand List of Seals, etc., 1874, p. 18. 



t Cat. Seals, p. 38. 



t Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., xvii, 1866, p. 145. 



